They get their power from Ukraine (which I always used to think was called the Ukraine, since it means borderland or something like that. You know, like the Beatles? But anyway...) I wonder why they don't just cut them off. "You don't want to be a part of our country? Okay then. *click*" Dickish, I know, but it would make a strong point.

How much is the Ukraine getting for the expropriation of property? Thousands of square miles of territory, all those government buildings, military bases, naval vessels on top of the Crimea portion of Ukraine's nation debt? Should be several billion dollars at least. Is Putin going to be paying by cash or check?

Ten billion is a lot of money, but a pretty cheap price to show the world that you can basically do whatever you want, and other nations are either too weak or too spineless to do anything meaningful about it.

Prey4reign:$50 billion for a Winter Olympics. $10 billion for a country that's going to pauper the Russian people. As a financial expert, Putin is a great topless model.

Alot of that money is paid to Russians (corrupt Russians, but also tax paying ones) so it didn't go too far.Crimea means alot more for doing business than just the port fees. Its got a warm water port and oil platforms.

croesius:Ten billion is a lot of money, but a pretty cheap price to show the world that you can basically do whatever you want, and other nations are either too weak or too spineless to do anything meaningful about it.

If Crimea has been settled by Russians, voted to go back with Russia, and is a financial drain on Kiev anyway, why do you think going to war over Crimea is a good idea?

I do not understand something. Russia can deny basihuman rights and dignityh to a section of its own population, and the world collectively shrugs. But Pooty-Poot sets foot in another country and suddenly it's all "Get out the nukes and let's bomb Russia back to the stone age!"

Meanwhile, the US more or less colonizes Afghanistan and Iraq and it's...what? Ensuring freedom? That sounds familiar...mostly because that's what Crimea claimed.

Cerebral Ballsy:croesius: Ten billion is a lot of money, but a pretty cheap price to show the world that you can basically do whatever you want, and other nations are either too weak or too spineless to do anything meaningful about it.

If Crimea has been settled by Russians, voted to go back with Russia, and is a financial drain on Kiev anyway, why do you think going to war over Crimea is a good idea?

croesius:Ten billion is a lot of money, but a pretty cheap price to show the world that you can basically do whatever you want, and other nations are either too weak or too spineless too far awayto do anything meaningful about it.

FTFY. Russia has 20,000 troops parked on Ukraine's doorstep, and was already based in Crimea. What would a spineful EU and US do about that? Teleport a couple NATO divisions into eastern Ukraine (which hasn't asked for them)? And the notion that nothing meaningful is being done about is BS, too.

maram500:I do not understand something. Russia can deny basihuman rights and dignityh to a section of its own population, and the world collectively shrugs. But Pooty-Poot sets foot in another country and suddenly it's all "Get out the nukes and let's bomb Russia back to the stone age!"

Meanwhile, the US more or less colonizes Afghanistan and Iraq and it's...what? Ensuring freedom? That sounds familiar...mostly because that's what Crimea claimed.

The U.S. didn't invade Afghanistan unilaterally; they went in alongside Afghan opponents of the Taliban that had been fighting for five years (remember the Northern Alliance?). The attempt since then to put a stable, democratic government in charge of the whole country has been a NATO mission, not a U.S. one., and has U.N. approval. Even Iraq was a multinational effort justified by Iraq's defiance of U.N. resolutions (much more arguable, but those existed).

The Crimea land grab is a completely unilateral, lawless move by Russia in direct violation of the treaty it signed with Ukraine as part of nuclear disarmament, and international law. It's been condemned by virtually the entire world, and it's going to lead to ever-increasing international sanctions against Russia.

timujin:They get their power from Ukraine (which I always used to think was called the Ukraine, since it means borderland or something like that. You know, like the Beatles? But anyway...) I wonder why they don't just cut them off. "You don't want to be a part of our country? Okay then. *click*" Dickish, I know, but it would make a strong point.

It was the Ukraine when it was called "the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic". You can see why, post independence, people using "the" bothers them.

mbillips:maram500: I do not understand something. Russia can deny basihuman rights and dignityh to a section of its own population, and the world collectively shrugs. But Pooty-Poot sets foot in another country and suddenly it's all "Get out the nukes and let's bomb Russia back to the stone age!"

Meanwhile, the US more or less colonizes Afghanistan and Iraq and it's...what? Ensuring freedom? That sounds familiar...mostly because that's what Crimea claimed.

The U.S. didn't invade Afghanistan unilaterally; they went in alongside Afghan opponents of the Taliban that had been fighting for five years (remember the Northern Alliance?). The attempt since then to put a stable, democratic government in charge of the whole country has been a NATO mission, not a U.S. one., and has U.N. approval. Even Iraq was a multinational effort justified by Iraq's defiance of U.N. resolutions (much more arguable, but those existed).

The Crimea land grab is a completely unilateral, lawless move by Russia in direct violation of the treaty it signed with Ukraine as part of nuclear disarmament, and international law. It's been condemned by virtually the entire world, and it's going to lead to ever-increasing international sanctions against Russia.

As I recall, the invasion of Iraq was a US-led effort wherein the world was cajoled into it by the administration faking evidence and applying pressure.

I'm still waiting for a nation to actually take action against someone who deserves it--Bashar al-Assad. But I guess there's no oil there.

There was never a plan to force Russia to abandon the Crimean region. Only a plan to make it as painful and expensive as possible.

In truth, this has given the EU and the US all the excuse they need to neuter Russia in Western affairs for the next twenty years.

The very best that Russia can hope for now is to become a proxy and vassal of China, selling their LNG to China. Of course, once American LNG is flowing to Europe, China will renegotiate the price of that Russian LNG much lower because who else is Russia going to sell to once they piss off the Western world?

I'm still waiting for a nation to actually take action against someone who deserves it--Bashar al-Assad. But I guess there's no oil there.

You think Assad deserves it more than Saddam Hussein did? Actually, there's lots of oil there; the EU hasn't done in Syria what they did in Libya because they didn't want to get into it with Russia. And the rebels include so many bad guys that it's hard to pick a side.

Nofun:Pfft, 10.2 Billion, with a "B?" That pocket change is what our government spends in one day.

Guess what? Our government can afford it. The U.S. has a $16 trillion GDP, compared to Russia's $2 trillion. Oops, you'll need to drop that Russian number a bit, as their stock market has fallen 21 percent since bad Vlad started all this nonsense.

Infernalist:There was never a plan to force Russia to abandon the Crimean region. Only a plan to make it as painful and expensive as possible.

In truth, this has given the EU and the US all the excuse they need to neuter Russia in Western affairs for the next twenty years.

The very best that Russia can hope for now is to become a proxy and vassal of China, selling their LNG to China. Of course, once American LNG is flowing to Europe, China will renegotiate the price of that Russian LNG much lower because who else is Russia going to sell to once they piss off the Western world?

Putin screwed up pretty bad.

And Canada has already positioned themselves to be China's supplier of LNG.

ongbok:Infernalist: There was never a plan to force Russia to abandon the Crimean region. Only a plan to make it as painful and expensive as possible.

In truth, this has given the EU and the US all the excuse they need to neuter Russia in Western affairs for the next twenty years.

The very best that Russia can hope for now is to become a proxy and vassal of China, selling their LNG to China. Of course, once American LNG is flowing to Europe, China will renegotiate the price of that Russian LNG much lower because who else is Russia going to sell to once they piss off the Western world?

Putin screwed up pretty bad.

And Canada has already positioned themselves to be China's supplier of LNG.

Naturally.

And what people aren't talking about is the fact that Russia remains a net importer of food stuffs.

The top three grain suppliers in the world? The United States, China and....Ukraine.

Infernalist:ongbok: Infernalist: There was never a plan to force Russia to abandon the Crimean region. Only a plan to make it as painful and expensive as possible.

In truth, this has given the EU and the US all the excuse they need to neuter Russia in Western affairs for the next twenty years.

The very best that Russia can hope for now is to become a proxy and vassal of China, selling their LNG to China. Of course, once American LNG is flowing to Europe, China will renegotiate the price of that Russian LNG much lower because who else is Russia going to sell to once they piss off the Western world?

Putin screwed up pretty bad.

And Canada has already positioned themselves to be China's supplier of LNG.

Naturally.

And what people aren't talking about is the fact that Russia remains a net importer of food stuffs.

The top three grain suppliers in the world? The United States, ChinaCanada and....Ukraine.

Infernalist:ongbok: Infernalist: There was never a plan to force Russia to abandon the Crimean region. Only a plan to make it as painful and expensive as possible.

In truth, this has given the EU and the US all the excuse they need to neuter Russia in Western affairs for the next twenty years.

The very best that Russia can hope for now is to become a proxy and vassal of China, selling their LNG to China. Of course, once American LNG is flowing to Europe, China will renegotiate the price of that Russian LNG much lower because who else is Russia going to sell to once they piss off the Western world?

Putin screwed up pretty bad.

And Canada has already positioned themselves to be China's supplier of LNG.

Naturally.

And what people aren't talking about is the fact that Russia remains a net importer of food stuffs.

The top three grain suppliers in the world? The United States, China and....Ukraine.

timujin:They get their power from Ukraine (which I always used to think was called the Ukraine, since it means borderland or something like that. You know, like the Beatles? But anyway...) I wonder why they don't just cut them off. "You don't want to be a part of our country? Okay then. *click*" Dickish, I know, but it would make a strong point.

ongbok:Infernalist: ongbok: Infernalist: There was never a plan to force Russia to abandon the Crimean region. Only a plan to make it as painful and expensive as possible.

In truth, this has given the EU and the US all the excuse they need to neuter Russia in Western affairs for the next twenty years.

The very best that Russia can hope for now is to become a proxy and vassal of China, selling their LNG to China. Of course, once American LNG is flowing to Europe, China will renegotiate the price of that Russian LNG much lower because who else is Russia going to sell to once they piss off the Western world?

Putin screwed up pretty bad.

And Canada has already positioned themselves to be China's supplier of LNG.

Naturally.

And what people aren't talking about is the fact that Russia remains a net importer of food stuffs.

The top three grain suppliers in the world? The United States, China and....Ukraine.

Ukraine, Europe's bread basket.

Putin is leading the Russian people into a world of hurt.

Ukraine taking direct action to cut off Russia/Crimea only giftwraps a pretext for invasion of all of Ukraine.

Cerebral Ballsy:If Crimea has been settled by Russians, voted to go back with Russia, and is a financial drain on Kiev anyway, why do you think going to war over Crimea is a good idea?

Dear Farkers: the next time you find yourself wondering what the expression "begging the question" actually means, I suggest you refer back to this post. It's a text book example of presuming the answer to the question supposedly asked. Let's take it a piece at a time.

Crimea has been settled by Russians Well, for certain values of "settled", I suppose. You might want to go look up the recent history of how Crimea came to be dominated by ethnic Russians, however it's unsuitable reading those who are queasy about ethnic cleansing.

voted to go back with Russia A hastily-arranged referendum, conducted in the presence of unbadged Russian troops, tanks, and various lawless militia, where ballots are not secret, and neither of the options was restoring the status quo ante, produces over 97% in favor of Russia? Seems legit.

and is a financial drain on Kiev anyway By the same token, we should cede Alaska to Russia, no?

why do you think going to war over Crimea is a good idea? Going to war is not the only option. It's not even near the top of the list of options.

maram500:I do not understand something. Russia can deny basihuman rights and dignityh to a section of its own population, and the world collectively shrugs. But Pooty-Poot sets foot in another country and suddenly it's all "Get out the nukes and let's bomb Russia back to the stone age!"

Meanwhile, the US more or less colonizes Afghanistan and Iraq and it's...what? Ensuring freedom? That sounds familiar...mostly because that's what Crimea claimed.

Colonizes Iraq and Afghanistan? With the entire populations of Arizona and Portland Oregon?

Only $10 billion? America spent over $700 billion beating Iraq into submission. The Sochi Olympics cost Russia $40 billion. The Russians took Crimea without any bloodshed worth mentioning, and the locals seem to support it overwhelmingly. So far it looks like a brilliant move. For such a strategically important piece of real estate, it sounds like a bargain.

Reading the article it looks clear that financially, Russia knew what it was getting into with Crimea. (Infrastructure and pension promises in particular) So this notion of Crimea being an anchor around Russia's neck seems to be wishful thinking at best, and the idea that some posters have implied that Putin didn't know how bad it was seems almost impossible now.

Maybe the degree and target of sanctions surprised him - maybe he thought, like most of us, that the only decent sanctions were fossil fuels. And he had a plan to deal with that. When the sanctions didn't directly hit fossil fuels, and hit people who are allies, that's what is causing him pause. Right now.

Maybe it's only temporary and can be overcome. "America took your billion? Here is a resort to "run" until you get it back." Maybe it will stop Russia AND will set Russia back for 20 years, like some are predicting. That would be great for everyone outside of Russia. But the notion that Putin stepped into a financial quagmire and that was a mistake... he knew what he was getting into.His mistake might be in not anticipating the sanctions Russia got hit with.

croesius:Ten billion is a lot of money, but a pretty cheap price to show the world that you can basically do whatever you want, and other nations are either too weak or too spineless to do anything meaningful about it.

The Conservative position on Crimea has been that Putin's aggression is directly against the interests of the West..... and that if we don't make Putin give Crimea back, then he wins, and we lose.

The reality is, his aggression is helping to strengthen the West politically and economically. His actions are not against our interests at all...... His aggression will send energy customers our way, and motivate nations to help further the goals of the West in order to gain our protection. Putin doesn't have to lose for us to win.

The West wants the world to know that we disapprove of Putin's shenanigans..... but, our limited actions are doing what is actually best in our interests. Putin is grabbing land from nations who are NOT allied with us. Russia's military strength is laughable when compared to the West..... and his tiny land grabs are NOT changing that fact.

We are sending a message to the World, we do not approve of Russia.... but, if you want our protection from them, then you have to be our ally. Devote assets and political influence to the goals of the West, and we will make sure that bullies do not pick on you.

mbillips:The U.S. didn't invade Afghanistan unilaterally; they went in alongside Afghan opponents of the Taliban that had been fighting for five years (remember the Northern Alliance?).

The "Northern Alliance" was a fiction; a nice, cosy sounding name for a disparate bunch of thugs and warlords who had and have nothing in common but could be presented in the press as a vaguely legitimate opposition movement. See also: Vidkun Quisling, Marshal Pétain.

timujin:They get their power from Ukraine (which I always used to think was called the Ukraine, since it means borderland or something like that. You know, like the Beatles? But anyway...) I wonder why they don't just cut them off. "You don't want to be a part of our country? Okay then. *click*" Dickish, I know, but it would make a strong point.

Since Ukraine is almost wholly dependent on Russia for energy, that *click* would be followed immediately by a rather bigger *click*.